ShareThis Page
Tim Benz: Who do you hate more? Antonio Brown or Le’Veon Bell? |
Tim Benz, Columnist

Tim Benz: Who do you hate more? Antonio Brown or Le’Veon Bell?

Tim Benz
Steelers receiver Antonio Brown celebrates his touchdown catch with Le’Veon Bell during the first quarter against the Colts Thursday, Nov. 24, 2016, at Lucas Oil Stadium in Indianapolis.

So, it’s come to this.

As recently as July, the Steelers fan base was proud to boast two of the top five players on the NFL Network’s “Top 100” list.

Running back Le’Veon Bell was No. 5. The big-chested wide receiver formerly known as Antonio Brown was No. 2. Their jerseys were flying off the racks. And even though the Steelers kept falling short of the Super Bowl, eh, they had all that talent. So, there was hope.

However, in the nine months since then, Bell refused to sign a $14.54 million franchise tag. Then on social media, he made himself a victim in the process, at times mocked the team’s shortcomings and openly flirted with division rivals to acquire him.

Brown threw temper tantrums on the sideline, is accused of throwing furniture off his patio, drove 100 mph down McKnight Road, ran wrong routes, skipped meetings, threatened one reporter, accused a second of racism, had a meltdown during the last week of the season, went AWOL until game day of a potential play-in game and blamed it all on the coach, the quarterback, the owner and the general manager.

Aside from that, they’ve been wonderful.

Now, a significant portion of the Steelers fanbase can’t wait to see both of them leave town. It’s not because of a drop in their talent. It’s because of their attitudes and actions.

They’ll likely get their wish. The Steelers have allowed Bell to become an unrestricted free agent. He’s gone. Brown wants a trade. The Steelers will probably get him one. So angry Steelers fans will probably get their wish. Which is a wish, they didn’t want to wish. Few in Pittsburgh want those two talents to leave. Yet, many want the two people gone as fast as possible because they feel dirty at the notion of rooting for them at this point.

Count me among that group. I’m so turned off by Brown and Bell that I’d rather see the Steelers lose without them than reconcile trying to root for them after what transpired in 2018.

It’s gotten to this point: “The DVE Morning Show” — on the Steelers’ flagship station, mind you — had a road-trip show in Florida on Friday. The crew spontaneously posed a question to an on-site studio audience. It was, “Who do you hate more? Brown or Bell?”

The vote was almost entirely against Brown. I thought the voting would be closer, but that’s how I’d lean as well.

Bell has been a jerk. He has flaunted wealth by crying poor. He has compared himself to Martin Luther King, Jr. in the wake of going to strip clubs and posing on jet skis. He has gotten himself suspended and cited for driving under the influence of marijuana.

Bell — and his snake of an agent, Adisa Bakari — backtracked as to what his intentions were going to be after he was tagged July 17. But at least when he was high on McKnight Road, he wasn’t attempting to break the sound barrier. Even in his greed, at least Bell’s initial goal was to work out a long-term deal to stay here. He didn’t sabotage his existence in the city in his hope to extricate himself from it, as Brown has done for the past few months, in the most public and despicable of ways.

Also, Bell — even in the depths of his social media activity — didn’t “like” posts implying the quarterback was guilty of rape and attack the coach at every opportunity.

To that end, I still like Bell bett … let me rephrase. I hate Bell less.

What do you think? Vote below.

Tim Benz is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Tim at [email protected] or via Twitter. All tweets could be reposted. All emails are subject to publication unless specified otherwise.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.